8-20 Widmer Street | 182.87m | 56s | Scott Shields

Status
Not open for further replies.

stjames2queenwest

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
2,773
Reaction score
2,736
Turn them into the crown. :p anyone watch the cartoon gargoyles? Xanatos had an awesome skyscraper built with a Scottish castle transplanted onto the crown of the building... That was awesome.
Just saying :p
 

Automation Gallery

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
12,654
Reaction score
3,251
Location
South Parkdale
8 WIDMER ST
Ward 20 - Tor & E.York District

Proposal for rezoning erlated to a 56 storey residential tower with 5 levels of below grade parking and a total of 583 residential units
Proposed Use --- # of Storeys --- # of Units ---
Applications:
Type Number Date Submitted Status
Rezoning 16 118450 STE 20 OZ Feb 19, 2016 Under Review
 

Tewder

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
5,401
Reaction score
152
City building isn't just about creating towers. This row of 'old' houses creates a delightful little side street with so much more potential. A city with vision would realize this. We've seen all kinds of creative way that density might be added, if need be, but let's be careful that the west side of Widmer doesn't end up looking like the east side of it. A small urban gesture I know but they add up. A forced comparison I grant but London's West End is just as much about the small side streets/urban gestures as it is the grand ones.
 

NBGtect

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 28, 2014
Messages
892
Reaction score
532
Haha, I think that the Planning and Development Dept is so overworked and cynical that they don't even care about spelling and grammar. I'm sure that they just want to write the following for every application:

The building is going to be massive like 60 or 70 stories or something; on like a 4 or 6 storey podium maybe; some space at street level for crappy retail (we are sure a Subway, nail salon, and dry cleaners have already signed leases for the future - so don't expect an Apple Store); tons of parking in many levels below grade so lord help you if you have a spot on the lowest level; we already know it's going to create shadows on Jesse Ketchum park even from this site's location on King St W; some of you will like the initial design but rest assured the DRP will make it far worse; some of you will hate the proposal as it destroys your nostalgic view of Toronto; some of you will hate it because it goes against everything your Ryerson/UofT Architecture Professor taught you; renderings forthcoming but the final building may or may not look like them (they won't); exterior cladding materials will be cheapened severely once building is under construction; attend the meeting to oppose it if you are an activist and have nothing to do on week nights but it's fruitless because it will be approved at the OMB.

Planning and Development
 

joelfooxj

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
2
Reaction score
1
Just thought I'd share an update - there's gonna be a community consultation meeting on Sep 12. Don't know where though.
 

cd concept

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 4, 2014
Messages
1,740
Reaction score
813
Wow I can't believe the density on this block! Where is the breathing space for those town homes. The podium should at Least blend in with those homes. But the condos balconies above are going to look great something like 1 Bloor East. With all the condos going up in that area. It will be hard to see it from a distance.
 

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
24,925
Reaction score
25,398
Location
by the Humber
Last night a public consultation about the project was held at Metro Hall… and it didn't really go as I thought it might. The chief concerns from the locals present were that there was no retail at ground level: the growing community here believes that there is not enough retail for the number of people moving to the area. This led a couple of commenters to ask whether we really need the Victorian houses to be retained along Widmer, remarking in particular that since the homes—according to the architect—will have to be taken down then rebuilt, whether that's worth it. Heritage Preservation was there to say that they believe the homes are worth saving, and that they believe that they can be saved without being taken down and rebuilt, as they consider that method to be little more than outright demolition.

For the Councillor's part, Cressy said that his office considers the proposal to be much too tall, but the biggest question is the separation distances between this tower and Plazacorp's to the north (going to the OMB), and Menkes' 87 Peter to the west, now under construction. Both of those buildings are 15 metres from this one, and that's because this proposal is 10 metres from the lot lines: both of the neighbouring buildings are 5 metres from their lot lines…

…or at least they will be if Plaza wins its appeal. If I have this right, 87 Peter would have been approved before the tall buildings guidelines were put in place (so it encroaches on these lots, which I don't believe it would be allowed to now), but Plazacorp now has the guidelines to deal with, and if the OMB rules the same way regarding Plazacorp that they did with Grid Condos on Jarvis, then the separation distance would grow (by dint of a smaller maximum floor plate on the Plazacorp site). 8-20 Widmer may still have to pull in 12.5 metres from its lots lines, not just 10 metres, to satisfy their part of the 25 metre separation distances, and maybe even more.

Anyway, it's complicated! There's no way that City Planning will recommend this for approval in its current form, and it's not certain to win at the OMB in its current form either. This proposal will change significantly before any shovels hit the ground.

42
 
Last edited:

ProjectEnd

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
11,435
Reaction score
20,537
I was also in attendance last night and @interchange42 is correct: it was one of the most informed and reasonable discussions I've ever witnessed. No one yelled about height or density (in fact, the only one who brought that up at all was Cressy), no one claimed that Toronto was changing for the worse 'with all these condos', no one decried the inevitable 'traffic nightmare' that is surely soon to unfold...In fact, one woman in the crowd cited a recent OMB decision regarding separation distances. No to grandstand with "abolish the OMB" nonsense, but to state that there is now precedent moving forward for how the board deals with things. Incredible and very refreshing!

In short, this wasn't a meeting of the sort we're accustomed. I've attended these things for close to ten years now and it really seemed like we've come a long way in the manner we discuss tall buildings and general urbanity in a rapidly growing city.
 

isaidso

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,814
Reaction score
1,573
What's the rationale for 183m being too tall on Widmer? I was under the impression that 200m+ in the Entertainment District was fine.
 

ProjectEnd

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
11,435
Reaction score
20,537
Way back when, the limit was 157m to match TIFF. We then had the 'clothesline' which tapered down from University to Spadina. Now Planning is trying out 'ridges' of uniform heights. I would assume that 8-20 Widmer peaks out above this particular ridge.
 

Bogtrotter

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
1,566
Reaction score
485
Location
Bayview Village
I'm trying to visualize ridges of uniform height. So building heights are staggered in accordance to what block they are on? This area is starting to look a bit like a table top of sameness so some sort of variation would be very welcome.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top